When Is It Appropriate to Challenge the Rules? Essay Example

Rules can be challenged when the appropriate circumstances are met. They function as guidelines for a society, normally promoting equality and integrity. When the purpose of a rule strays away from this purpose, oppression and deceivery typically surface. Rules should also respect an individual’s religious beliefs. A person’s religion or religious beliefs should be respected by such regulations as they are part of their family’s lineage, which carries over to their descendants. Rules are placed in order to protect a person’s individuality, refraining others from threatening it and the balance of society. But when they are placed opposing this purpose, the authority must be challenged to maintain peace and freedom within a society. When rules begin to oppose one’s morals, independence, or are created with the intent of exploitation, they are deemed appropriate to be challenged.

Often enough, when benefits are involved in situations, exploitation and injustice follow after, inciting the desire for justice and truth among individuals. In George Orwell’s Animal Farm, Orwell believes human corruption and abuse of power should be challenged. In the story, Mr Jones, the ruler of the farm,  mistreats the animals because of his reigning authority. The animals challenge his misuse of his authority, portraying one of Orwell’s ideas of challenging the abuse of power of individuals. This also conveys his theme regarding human nature, in which he believes situations where one abuses their power should be challenged as well as where one is corrupted by their power. The animals are challenging the abusive conditions inflicted upon them by the humans on the farm as well as the humans because they are benefited off of with no return or compensation. Orwell writes, “Man is the only creature that consumes without producing...Our labour tills the soil, our dung fertilises it, and yet there is not one of us that owns more than his bare skin...Only get rid of Man, and the produce of our labour would be our own..What then must we do?” (7-8). Orwell incorporates rhetorical questions, repetition, and details in order to exemplify the need for rebellion and change. In Major’s speech, Major repeatedly mentions and associates “Man” with harsh and negative details. He then asks a rhetorical question to transition into his call to action. By repeatedly utilizing the word “man” and following it up with negative details to describe the humans, Major conveys to the animals that humans have an evil, greedy nature. By then incorporating the detail of how their labour benefits Mr. Jones and they on the other end receive nothing, he is able to draw out feelings of anger out of the animals. By adding on the detail that they would be able to reap the benefits of their labour if humans were gone, this not only motivates the animals but also further accumulates their anger. Thus, he can successfully use the call to action to make the animals challenge their situation confidently. Orwell emanates the theme of resistance to exploitation, especially when the dangers of naive individuals under one’s authority become their reality. Through Old Major’s speech, he encourages individuals to resist the abuse of one’s rule, and to struggle for their freedom through the means of challenging said rule.

Similarly enough, when the circumstances of a situation ethically conflict with the religious beliefs of an individual or group, their moral convictions drive them to challenge the rules protecting the situation. In Sophocles’s play, “Antigone”, he thinks situations where the morals of an individual are opposed should be challenged. This is seen through Antigone, whose religious and moral beliefs conflict with Creon’s oppressive rule, prompting Antigone to challenge his power and her sister who stands with Creon’s law. Antigone is challenging the situation regarding Creon’s decree that denies the burial of her brother Polyneicês who, like their other brother Eteocles, died with bravery.  She challenges her sister Ismene to follow her in contesting Creon’s rule as her morals and ethics act as her motive to challenge Creon’s decree because of her strong belief that following her religion is necessary and worth the sacrifice. Sophocles writes, “I say that this crime is holy../ You may do as you like / Since apparently the laws of the god mean nothing to you” (line 59-66). Antigone is written using a tenacious tone. Sophocles conveys Antigone’s unwavering resolve to challenge Creon’s decree and bury Polyneicês’s body through the portrayal of her justification of the situation. Antigone justifies her crime as a holy duty, with her mind set on honoring her dead brother Polyneicês. Her tone conveys her moral beliefs with the use of specific diction. Antigone uses words and phrases such as “holy” and “laws of the god'' to justify her judgement, conveying a powerful purpose to Ismene. Her morals and ethics, shaped by her religious beliefs and portrayed by her tone, motivate her to challenge Creon’s decree. If she were to feign unstirred by Creon’s rule, she would have demeaned her family’s lineage and the legacy of her ancestors. Sophocles promotes self-sacrifice, rather than self-betrayal, showing Antigone’s decision to challenge Creon’s edict knowing the consequences and her pride in her moral convictions.

In addition, when the independence of oneself or group of individuals is threatened, the desire for sovereignty over one’s being rationalizes the need to challenge the rules imposing such threat. In Patrick Henry’s "Speech to the Virginia Convention", Henry believes situations where prejudice is present should be challenged, in order to protect their individuality and sovereignty over oneself. He challenges the status of the colonies' liberty and his fellow colonists to stand with him on his restortment to war due to the lack of negotiation options the colonies have to defend their liberty which motivates Henry to challenge such a situation. Henry states, “Sir, we have done everything that could be done, to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne.. we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne” (par. 5). Henry utilizes an angry, tenacious tone. He presents numerous instances of their attempts to make peace with the British where each one failed, leaving them with no other option than war, thus justifying Henry’s resortment to war to challenge the British. His angry tone and his presentation of failed attempts to make peace with the British evoke similar feelings of anger within those at the conference. By listing how the colonies had to grovel and beg to the British just to be rudely rejected, his audience such as those at the convention come to understand Henry’s anger towards the British. Henry brings awareness to their situation through his angry and determined tone combined with details, which in turn, vindicate to the audience his call to action. His arguments convey that ignorance to oppressive rules such as Britain’s, would only jeopardize one’s rights and autonomy.

In the situation that rules pose a risk to one’s morals, independence, or inflict exploitation, the ability to resist authority is vindicated by these conditions. Conditions such as the one Orwell portrays, when the innocent are exploited, deserve challenge. When the animals finally realize Jones had been exploiting and mistreating them, taking all the resources for himself, the animals seek equality and integrity through the means of overthrowing Jone’s authority. The event where one’s morals and religion comes into conflict with an imperious rule as portrayed by Sophocles entertains such conditions. Creon’s decree denies the burial of Antigone’s brother, which to Antigone is unethical due to her religious beliefs. His decree defies Antigone’s religious rights to bury her brother, thus impelling her to defend and fight for what she stands for. Henry’s awareness of the colonies' oppression by Britain drove him to challenge his fellow colonists to stand up for themselves rather than feign ignorance as well as defy Britain’s power. Rules should protect the liberty of individuals, but when such is not the occasion, individuals must fend for themselves and take the initiative. When rules or an authority impose unjust circumstances, individuals are given the right to defy and challenge such situations by any means necessary.